Hey Ara, thanks so much for this thoughtful and heartfelt post. There is so much here that it makes it challenging to respond in writing, but a few off-the-cuff reactions:
– Personally, I don’t sense the level of negativity and getting stuck on old arguments in the forum that you do; but I definitely hope that as much as possible, where there is disagreement, we can agree to disagree instead of arguing. Already it’s clear to me from the written exchanges as well as the WG dialog so far that there is A LOT of common ground
– I think that most of your bulleted items above lend themselves to potential Solutions. Let’s formalize these and work on them together! The Collective Action working group needs to get going on this. Some of your suggestions fit in the purview of other working groups – and my guess is that many of them are already being addressed. Cross-group communication is a challenge the organizers are struggling with, but we are hoping that draft Solutions will emerge early enough that they can be shared with other WGs for comment prior to the Summit. Also, about half the time at the Summit itself will be dedicated to working on Solutions together.
– I think it would be naive to imagine that we can transcend or resolve the decades-old conflicts between environmental groups and industry in this Summit, but I think we can make progress by identifying and building off of common ground and shared objectives. For the Collective Action group, I think we can perhaps best get at this by working on the Vision statement together – which we probably need to start doing pretty soon.
– There is no way we can pause and revamp this Summit, but nor is there a reason that a future event and/or process growing out of this meeting couldn’t be designed in a way that addresses your concerns and embodies more of your vision. This is a way station, not an end point. Already, The Forest Dialog is planning a series of dialogs focused on mass timber and forests where “[s]takeholders will come together to build collective understanding of the major conflicting viewpoints, discuss challenges, and explore opportunities to scaling climate-positive forest products. Relevant actors will discuss the climate impacts of forest products and build agreement around the scope and nature of a climate-positive forest economy and how it can be achieved.” WWF is also involved in this dialog, and I expect that many other Summit participants will be as well. There is a commitment to share information and resources with the goal of creating synergies. Also, you mention the Forest Economy Program. Several of the key individuals/organizations involved in managing this Program, as well as a number of its funders, are participating in the Summit. Again the goal is sharing and cross-fertilization so we can hopefully make progress at speed and at scale.
– I love this: “Healthy forests, valued for all of their benefits. Beautiful cities and homes and buildings, made from wood products that are from sustainably managed forests. A reduction of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. A world adapting to climate change. A connected, trusting community.” Let’s go after it!